You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!

Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.

Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.

Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide

This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.

Way back when I was looking into various distros to try, I came across that website, while looking into Gentoo. It always makes me laugh, and I have to remind myself of it when I start going down the path of "Gentoo might be interesting to try."

I have to remind myself of it when I start going down the path of "Gentoo might be interesting to try."

While Gentoo can be used that way there is absolutely no necessity to do so. Gentoo is more a meta-distribution than a distribution, a distribution construction kit. That you can "optimize" in ways that aren't advisable doesn't mean that you have to.
Discarding a distro because some people do things with it that one wouldn't do with the own system seems to me somewhat weird, you are actually robbing yourself of an experience just because others do things you don't like.
I have tried it (and other source-based distributions) and if Slackware wouldn't exist a source-based distribution like Gentoo would be the next closest thing to what I expect from a distribution.

While Gentoo can be used that way there is absolutely no necessity to do so. Gentoo is more a meta-distribution than a distribution, a distribution construction kit. That you can "optimize" in ways that aren't advisable doesn't mean that you have to.
Discarding a distro because some people do things with it that one wouldn't do with the own system seems to me somewhat weird, you are actually robbing yourself of an experience just because others do things you don't like.
I have tried it (and other source-based distributions) and if Slackware wouldn't exist a source-based distribution like Gentoo would be the next closest thing to what I expect from a distribution.

Oh, I'm not saying I'll never try it, quite the contrary, I find the idea of Gentoo fascinating. But I'm still in the process of wrapping my brain around the "Slackware way" and so I don't feel qualified just yet to make the jump to Gentoo. Baby steps! Heck, after some difficulty, I just successfully installed my first SlackBuild.

That is why the original author is changing the design. Doesn't seem to be that hard, and funnily AlienBob uses a somewhat similar approach for his ARM port, that can be easily adapted to do the same thing.

But anyways, I rather questioned your tone. If you would have said "Hey, that is what Gentoo does, maybe you should rather look at that." I wouldn't have objected your post. Instead it was more like "Go away, this is not like we do it in Slackware!"
After all, it is still open source and the OP can do what he likes with his systems, regardless if you like that attitude or not.

Meh, GCC, as much as it was traditionally 'flagship' compiler in linux community it was never really the best piece of code, and considering how big, fat and hard to maintain has become it never will be. Hence, I would suggest that everyone looking to some optimizations in compiling shift their attention to LLVM/Clang. Its codebase is very clean, it is backed up by big names: google, apple, so it is very actively developed and has bright future. Completely open source as well. Its performance jumped quite so in recent SVN builds, and I would not be suprised if already surpassed gcc in both compiling speed and speed of created binaries. I was happy to see it included in Slackware 14 release, and I hope that one day all Slackware packages will be prebuilt with clang. I understand slackware's conservative approach to changes in software (and I am like that too, so I feel with slackware at home) but consider that FreeBSD already switched to clang and dropped gcc, and that alone says much...

Meh, GCC, as much as it was traditionally 'flagship' compiler in linux community it was never really the best piece of code, and considering how big, fat and hard to maintain has become it never will be. Hence, I would suggest that everyone looking to some optimizations in compiling shift their attention to LLVM/Clang. Its codebase is very clean, it is backed up by big names: google, apple, so it is very actively developed and has bright future. Completely open source as well. Its performance jumped quite so in recent SVN builds, and I would not be suprised if already surpassed gcc in both compiling speed and speed of created binaries. I was happy to see it included in Slackware 14 release, and I hope that one day all Slackware packages will be prebuilt with clang. I understand slackware's conservative approach to changes in software (and I am like that too, so I feel with slackware at home) but consider that FreeBSD already switched to clang and dropped gcc, and that alone says much...

lot of nonsens in this post.
the FreeBSD change is primary for License reasons, not cause of a better compiler.
and that's the same reason Apple and others are so interested in clang, they can make their own stuff out of it and stop sharing any time they want, and that's the reason why there is so much marketing blabla arraound.
the best thing on clang is that gcc has now competition and therefore more will to change some things.
gcc is now written in C++, so it seems still to be maintainable , has also nice error messages, and the result performs much better than clang binaries.
and talking about supported platfroms, naja, you simply can not replace gcc.

the FreeBSD change is primary for License reasons, not cause of a better compiler.

Of course its better. Its actually quite hard not to be better, you should put your gnu/linux fanboyism aside for a moment, educate yourself on things and then try to objectively judge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by a4z

and that's the same reason Apple and others are so interested in clang, they can make their own stuff out of it

and... whats the problem?

Quote:

Originally Posted by a4z

and stop sharing any time they want

Why would they do that, BSD licence is even more permissive then GPL...

Quote:

Originally Posted by a4z

the best thing on clang is that gcc has now competition and therefore more will to change some things.

disagree. what shall gcc do to 'compete'? Suddenly hire more developers to be able to keep up? Don't make me laugh... That competition scheme works only among companies and not open source projects.

Quote:

Originally Posted by a4z

gcc is now written in C++, so it seems still to be maintainable ,

yea, c++ now allows them to write even more unmaintanable and unholy-messier code. they are just brining levels of complexity, like what they have been doing for years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by a4z

and the result performs much better than clang binaries.

In what, speed? Maybe for now, but there is much improvement regarding that even in current clang SVN builds. And not to talk about quality of produced binary in which gcc was never on pair with other commercially developed compilers.

shadowww, thanks a lot for your words, they are a real eye opener for me, I promise that I will even work more hard from now to lower my fanboyism (except for Slackware) and to acquire knowledge, even if I have heavy doubts that I will ever reach the level of wisdom you have obviously reached.

I will not join that discussion about Gentoo and the 'better' compiler. It's ridiculous to talk about something that is not finished and can't even compile a complete Linux kernel (right now) and compare it to the GCC .

I really like the idea of a make.conf like in FreeBSD. Maybe you don't get the biggest performance boost out of it, maybe even none, but it's still a cool thing. Even if it is just for the fun and the education you'll get out of some tryouts with compilerflags. I can't nor I want to understand people beeing against that kind of thing. There is nothing bad about it and when the OP has the efford to finish it I will definitely give it a try. Even if it gives you nothing, it's still better then another gnome fork.
For some time I was rebuilding a lot of Slackware packages with my own flags etc. First just for my 3 RaspberryPis, but now even on my other machines.
It would be handy to have a config for that.